IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.2640 of 2025 Decided on: 1st April, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bhumi Singh …..Petitioner Versus H.P. Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. .....Respondent ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Om Prakash Goel, Advocate. For the Respondent: Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Advocate vice Ms. Maheshwari Sharma, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Notice. Mr. Rakesh K. Sharma, Advocate vice Ms. Maheshwari Sharma, learned Standing Counsel, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard at this stage. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance of the petitioner as raised in the petition has already been adjudicated in Tulsi Ram vs. The Himachal 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Ltd. & Ors.2 Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner would be content in case the respondents are directed to examine his case in light of the aforesaid judgment within a fixed time schedule. 4. Learned vice counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute the fact that similar issue as raised in the present petition, has been adjudicated in Tulsi Ram’s2 case. He further submitted that, however, the facts of the instant case are required to be verified by the Corporation as also the fact that as to whether the aforesaid judgment has attained finality or not. 5. In view of above submissions, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of relief prayed by him and verify the facts of the instant case vis-à-vis the decision rendered in Tulsi Ram’s2 case, within a period of two months from today. In case the petitioner is found to be situated similar to the petitioners in the aforesaid case, then same benefit, as has been given to the petitioners in Tulsi Ram’s2 case, shall be granted to the petitioner in the instant case. The decision so arrived at, be also communicated to the petitioner. 2 CWP No.4427 of 2023, decided alongwith connected matters on 11.01.2024 3 The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Jyotsna Rewal Dua April 01, 2025 Judge Mukesh